By lowering the US shipping fee from $10 to $8, we will reduce checkout friction and sticker shock at the shipping step, increasing checkout completion rate and overall conversion rate. The test will determine whether the lift in conversion at $8 offsets the $2 reduction in per-order shipping revenue, optimizing for net revenue per visitor rather than conversion alone.

What we tested: A 3-way sitewide US shipping price test, current $10 flat rate (Control) vs $8 vs $7, to find the price that best balances conversion against shipping revenue. Recorded in the fields here: Control ($10) vs the $8 arm. The $7 arm is summarized below so it isn't lost. What happened ($8 vs Control): - Conversion rate: Control 1.41% vs $8 1.51% (+7%) - Revenue per visitor: Control $1.61 vs $8 $1.74 (+8%) - Average order value: Control $114.29 vs $8 $115.32 (+1%) - Net revenue: $69,031.90 vs $71,958.11 The $7 arm (not in the fields above): 41,402 visitors, 619 orders, $70,346.24 net revenue, conversion rate 1.50%, revenue per visitor $1.70, average order value $113.65. It also beat Control, but by less than $8 on every metric. Confidence: $8 beats Control with roughly 88% confidence on conversion rate and 83% on revenue per visitor, directionally strong, but just under the 85% bar on revenue per visitor, so treat this as a solid directional win rather than a statistically locked one. Among all three arms, $8's probability of being the single best option is 55% ($7 is 36%, Control ~9%). Why it matters: Dropping US shipping from $10 to $8 lifted both conversion and revenue per visitor while holding order value flat, the lower fee cut checkout friction without shrinking the basket. $8 outperformed $7, so going all the way to $7 isn't necessary; $8 captures the gain. Recommend rolling out $8 as the new US shipping rate. Note: Ran 6 days (Jun 10 – Jun 16), ~42K visitors per arm. Short runtime, worth confirming over a fuller cycle, but the direction is consistent across conversion rate and revenue per visitor.

Adding a clearly visible gift-wrap add-on in the cart drawer (with price and value props) will lift AOV through incremental upsell revenue without hurting conversion.

CVR +7.41%, RPV +4.56%, AOV -2.65%. Est. +524 orders/mo, +$34,825/mo. 97% confidence (one-tailed z-test). A visible, low-friction upsell in the cart removed a barrier for gift buyers. RPV rose even as AOV dipped slightly (more single-item gift buyers), net positive. Ran pre-BFCM, so validate uptake outside the gifting season.

A user-generated video section below the CTA gives hesitant scrollers social proof and visual clarity (real customers, real fit and color), reducing purchase hesitation.

CVR +5.87%, RPV +7.20%, AOV +1.26%. Est. +297 orders/mo, +$39,868/mo. 88% confidence (small sample, ~12.7k/arm). Real customer videos reassured visitors who scroll past the CTA; AOV lifted alongside CVR. Roll out and keep the UGC library fresh.

A stock widget (in stock / low stock / pre-order) reduces hesitation and sets shipping expectations, preventing delayed decisions and checkout abandonment.

CVR +2.02%, RPV +1.90%, AOV flat. Est. +288 orders/mo, +$29,276/mo. 72% confidence. "In stock, ready to ship" removed a silent objection and signaled reliability to first-time buyers. Ran during peak holiday traffic, validate the lift holds in normal conditions.

By surfacing claims-safe product value props inside the slide cart drawer, we expect carted visitors, particularly first-time buyers who have not yet built trust in the brand, to hold their intent through to checkout, thereby lifting checkout completion and revenue per visitor.

Both variations beat control on revenue per visitor; the probability that control was best was 1%. V1 led with +5.4% CVR and +8.7% RPV unfiltered, and AOV up +3.1%. The effect sat almost entirely with new visitors (about 77% of traffic): +7.9% CVR and +12.6% RPV, while returning visitors were flat. That is mechanistically coherent: value props inform first-time buyers; returning buyers already know the terms. Honesty note on the headline: add-to-cart rate drifted about +2.2% between arms before the change could even render, so part of the raw lift is noise. Conditioned on actual cart exposure, the defensible effect is about +3% CVR / +6% RPV overall, and +6% CVR / +11% RPV among new visitors. We report the conservative number. Caveats we logged: about 97% of traffic was mobile so desktop was unreadable, the 2.1-day runtime had no weekend in it, and a concurrent test added variance late in the window.

If we remove the AI shopping agent widget from the PDP, then conversion rate and revenue per visitor will increase, because clearing an interruptive overlay from the mobile buy zone removes distraction and decision friction for the 99% of visitors who never engage with it, and eliminates off script AI answers and discount nudges that undermine trust and anchor order value down.

Winner: removing the widget lifted CVR ~+2.4% relative (3.96% to 4.05%) and RPV ~+4.2%, with AOV up ~+1.8% ($67.66 to $68.86). 1. The AOV lift aligns with the widget's own admin data, where agent assisted sessions had lower AOV than unassisted ($69.01 vs $70.98). The agent's discount nudges anchored orders down; removing them recovered both conversion and order value. 2. Vendor dashboards overstate value. The agent claimed $24K in "agent assisted sales", yet the controlled test shows the store earns more without it. Judge widgets by A/B tests, never by attributed revenue. 3. Default on app embeds are not neutral. This one shipped bundled with the Clarity analytics app and was never deliberately chosen. Audit app embeds after every app install or update. 4. The engagement telemetry predicted the outcome: under 1% engagement, 1.1 turns and 7 second conversations meant the widget was visual noise at the decision point. These signals can pre-qualify future removal tests. 5. Pattern for this account: the skeptical 40+ mobile buyer converts better with fewer interruptions in the buy zone. Next: switch the widget off sitewide (single app embed toggle) and prioritize the pre checkout upsell popup removal test, which follows the same principle.